|
|
English
as the Global Language:
Good for Business, Bad for Literature
English is well on its way to
becoming the dominant global language. Is this a good thing? Yes, in
fields such as science where a common language brings efficiency gains.
But the global dominance of the English language is bad news for world
literature, according to CEPR researcher Jacques Mélitz (Centre de
Recherche en Economie et Statistique, Paris and CEPR). Why? Because if
the English language dominates world publishing, very few translations
except those from English to other languages will be commercially
viable. As a result, virtually only those writing in English will have a
chance of reaching a world audience and achieving ‘classic status’.
The outcome is clear, Mélitz argues: just as in the sciences, those who
wish to reach a world audience will write in English. “World
literature will be an English literature”, Mélitz warns, “and will
be the poorer for it – as if all music were written only for the
cello”. His work appears in "English-Language
Dominance, Literature and Welfare," (CEPR
Discussion Paper No. 2055). By literature, he refers to imaginative
works of an earlier vintage that are still read today, and therefore the
accumulation of world literature refers to the tiny fraction of
currently produced imaginative works which will eventually be regarded
as ‘classics’. According to Mélitz, the tendency of competitive
forces in the global publishing market to privilege the translation of
English fiction and poetry into other languages for reading or listening
enjoyment may damage the production of world literature and in this
respect make us all worse off.
Mélitz
makes the following points:
·
Language matters: In the case
of literature, as opposed to other uses of language, language does not
serve merely to communicate content (say, a story line) but is itself an
essential source of enjoyment. Therefore, it is futile to argue that
nothing would change if all potential contributors to literature wrote
in the same language. “We might as well pretend that there would be no
loss if all musical composers wrote for the cello” said Mélitz.
Translations can only approximate the rhythms, sounds, images, allusions
and evocations of the original, and in literature, those aspects are
essential.
· Great
authors write in only one language: Remarkably few people have ever
made contributions to world literature in more than one language.
Beckett and Nabokov may be the only two prominent examples. Conrad, who
is sometimes mentioned in this connection, is a false illustration in a
glaring regard: he never wrote in his native Polish. Quite
conspicuously, expatriate authors generally continue to write in their
native language even after living for decades away from home. This holds
not only for poets, such as Mickiewicz and Milosz, which may not be
surprising, but also for novelists. Mann went on composing in German
during a long spell in the US. The list of authors who have inscribed
their names in the history of literature in more than one language since
the beginning of time is astonishingly short.
· English is
much more likely to be translated: For straightforward economic
reasons, only works that enjoy exceptionally large sales have any
notable prospect of translation. Heavy sales in the original language
represent an essential criterion of selection for translation, though
not the only one. As a result, translations will be concentrated in
original creations in the major languages. Since English is the
predominant language in the publishing industry, authors writing in
English have a much better chance of translation than those writing in
other tongues.
·
English dominance of translations
has increased: The dominance of English in translations has actually
gone up over the last 30 years, despite a general decline in the market
share of English in the world publishing market. When English
represented about a quarter of the world publishing market in the early
1960’s, the percentage of English in translations was already 40%.
With the general advance of literacy and standards of living in the
world, the share of English in world publishing fell to around 17% in
the late 1980’s. Yet the language's share in translations rose to
surpass 50% during this time.
·
If you want to reach a world
audience, write in English: In science, as in literature, a person
writing in a minor language has a better chance of publication than one
writing in a major tongue, but will necessarily have a much smaller
chance of translation and international recognition. The result in
science is clear. Those who strive to make a mark in their discipline
try to publish in English. By and large, the ones who stick to their
home language – English excepted, of course – have lower ambitions
and do less significant work. The same pressure to publish in English
exists for those engaged in imaginative writing who wish to attain a
world audience.
·
English dominance may cause the
world pool of talent to dry up: However, the evidence shows that in
the case of literary writing, the gifted – even the supremely gifted
– in a language other than English generally cannot turn to English by
mere dint of effort and will-power. Thus, the dominance of English may
sap their incentive to invest in personal skills and to shoot for
excellence. Working toward the same result are the relatively easier
conditions of publication they face at home. If so, the dominance of
English in translations may cause the world pool of talent to dry up.
· Literature
may become just another field where the best work is in English: In
other words, the dominance of English poses the danger that literary
output will become just another field where the best work is done in
English. In this case, the production of imaginative prose and poetry in
other languages may be relegated to the same provincial status that such
writing already has acquired in some other areas of intellectual
activity. But whereas the resulting damage is contestable in fields
where language serves essentially for communication, such as science in
general, the identical prospect is alarming in the case of literature.
Along
with the advances in telecommunications in the last thirty years, the
dominance of English in auditory and audiovisual entertainment has
become far greater than in books. Does the argument about translations
in literature apply more generally and explain this wider ascension of
English too? The answer is partly positive as regards television, but
mostly negative in connection with the cinema. US television series
indeed benefit from an unusually large home audience and only travel
abroad when successful domestically. On the other hand, a film need not
succeed in the home market before being made available to
foreign-language cinema audiences. Hollywood achieved an important place
in the cinema in the era of the silent film.
Notes
for Editors:
CEPR is a network of over 450 Research Fellows based throughout Europe,
who collaborate through the Centre in research and its dissemination.
CEPR helps its Research Fellows to develop projects, obtain funding,
administer them and disseminate their results. The Centre’s research
ranges from open economy macroeconomics to trade policy, from the
economic transformation of Central and Eastern Europe to regionalism in
the world economy. CEPR takes no institutional policy positions.
CEPR is an ESRC Resource Centre. For further information about CEPR,
please contact Rita
Gilbert, External Relations Officer, Tel 44
20
7878 2917, Fax 44 20 7878 2999 or by email on rgilbert@cepr.org.
Jacques
Mélitz is a Professor of Economics at Centre de Recherche en Economie
et Statistique and a Research Fellow in CEPR’s International
Macroeconomics programme.
‘English-Language
Dominance, Literature and Welfare’
Jacques
Mélitz
CEPR
Discussion Paper No. 2055
£4.00
(single sales £5.00)
CEPR,
90–98 Goswell Road, London EC1V 7RR, UK
Tel: (+ 44 20) 7878 2900
Fax: (+ 44 20) 7878 2999
Email: orders@cepr.org
|
|